Surprise: MPAA Told It Can't Use Terms 'Piracy,' 'Theft' Or 'Stealing' During Hotfile Trial
Facebook Needs To Learn It Can't Teach Tolerance By Acting As An Overzealous Censor

Feinstein And Rogers Try To Scare Americans With Ooga Booga Terrorism Threats

Overhype

from the halloween-was-a-month-ago dept

Mon, Dec 2nd 2013 7:39am — Mike Masnick
It appears that the heads of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, Senator Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers, are recognizing that their strategy for keeping their co-dependent relationship with the NSA going is failing and that the American public and an increasingly large segment of Congress no longer believes their bogus claims. Perhaps that's because every time they open their mouths, it takes all of about an hour before many of their claims are completely debunked, if not outright mocked for obviously being bogus. So their latest strategy? To basically yell "Ooga Booga Terrorists!" as loud as they can to try to scare people based on absolutely nothing.

Feinstein and Rogers did a little dance on Sunday political TV shows insisting that "the terrorism threat is increasing" and we're all going to die if we stop trying to make sure the NSA actually, you know, respects the Constitution. Asked if we were "safer" now than a year or two years ago, Feinstein kicked off the FUD:
“I don’t think so,” Feinstein replied. “I think terror is up worldwide, the statistics indicate that. The fatalities are way up. The numbers are way up. There are new bombs, very big bombs. Trucks being reinforced for those bombs. There are bombs that go through magnetometers. The bomb maker is still alive. There are more groups than ever. And there is huge malevolence out there.”
And Rogers quickly followed:
“I absolutely agree that we’re not safer today for the same very reasons,” he said. “So the pressure on our intelligence services to get it right to prevent an attack are enormous. And it’s getting more difficult.”
Of course, Feinstein's claim that "terror is up worldwide" is -- as is so often the case with her (and Rogers') claims about terrorism -- sorta true, but highly misleading. Yes, recent stats show an uptick in terrorist attacks and fatalities in 2012 -- but you can also see that it's highly variable. Earlier in the year, before the 2012 numbers came out, people were commenting on the fact that terror attacks and fatalities around the globe had been on the decline since 2007. Terrorism is highly variable and dependent on a few big successful attacks. Furthermore, if we look at attacks on the US, we find that there have basically been next to none in the US since 2001. You could make the case that 16 people have died in US "terrorist" attacks since 2001 (including the 13 soldiers killed by Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood), but you have to have a very broad definition of terrorism to do so.

Nearly all of the "terrorist" attacks in that original report that Feinstein is obviously relying on, appear to take place in areas that are considered war zones: Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. And, um, I hate to bring this part up, but part of the reason why those are war zones is because, you know, the US invaded both places. This isn't to say that there aren't terrorists out there who would like to attack the US. There clearly are. But it seems highly misleading to make the claims that both Feinstein and Rogers are making here, as the "data" they're talking about don't show any heightened risk in the US at all.

Either way, this whole thing -- having both appear together, both making vague "we're all going to die" statements without any details to back it up combined with an exceptionally misleading use of statistics -- suggests that this is the typical FUD. It's Feinstein and Rogers shouting "terror" in a crowded theater, because they know that they've already lost public opinion on this, and are quickly losing Congress as well.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: dianne feinstein, fud, mike rogers, nsa, surveillance, terrorists

81 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

The First Word

“
Since the NSA programs have been shown to have been operational for several years, but now apparently the threat of terrorist attacks is higher than ever...wouldn't that point to the NSA programs being completely ineffective?

You don't scream and shout that you must continue your highly controversial program by saying it's actually failed in it's stated mission goal.
—Rikuo
 ”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Rikuo (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 2:41am

    Since the NSA programs have been shown to have been operational for several years, but now apparently the threat of terrorist attacks is higher than ever...wouldn't that point to the NSA programs being completely ineffective?

    You don't scream and shout that you must continue your highly controversial program by saying it's actually failed in it's stated mission goal.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      silverscarcat (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 6:00am

      Re:

      Shhh!

      Don't point out the gaping hole of logic to these two. You'll make their heads explode.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:42am

        Re: Re:

        And that would be bad because?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:49am

          Re: Re: Re:

          That would be 'inciting terror'.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:25am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I doubt very seriously anyone would be terrorized if their heads exploded. After all those bombs they are talking about may very well only exist in their heads.

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              btrussell (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 4:21am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Hot air bring shot by your ears at supersonic speed could cause hearing damage/loss.

              [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        JMT (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 12:24pm

        Re: Re:

        "You'll make their heads explode."

        Shouldn't the potential for having a self-destructing head get you put on the no-fly list?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 6:03am

      Re:

      Grab your towels and cleaning apparel. There will be blown up brains to clean up if the NSA-cheerleaders read this.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      fogbugzd (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 6:10am

      Re:

      Feinstein's statistics may include the FBI sting operations.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:26am

      Re:

      NSA is not responsible for anything other than surveillance of whatever might be interesting for USA, the employees of NSA or their friends in companies.

      They do not stop terrorism by existing, just like they cannot prevent more terrorism by ramping up surveillance!

      Anything active is all about the thing NSA sucks at: Sharing the right information with the right people.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      scotts13 (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:00am

      Re:

      In fact, since cause-and-effect seems to be a little too hard for many politicians, perhaps it's that NSA activity CAUSES terrorism? Both curves are apparently rising...

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      btrussell (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 4:19am

      Re:

      Thank you for saving me the typing.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    rw (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 5:57am

    'Of course, Feinstein's claim that "terror is up worldwide"...'

    I think they are probably right, at least for state-sponsored terrorism. ...Oh, by state-sponsored I mean US sponsored. TSA terrorism is at an all time high.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 10:58am

      Re:

      Feinstein is a bigger threat to the United States than any terrorist organization. Nothing the terrorists can ever possibly do is as bad as what America will become if these people are not voted out. In all actuality I honestly believe Rogers and Feinstein need to spend the rest of their lives in prison for these crimes against the constitution.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Howard (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 6:53am

      There are new bombs

      Bigger bombs, flying in UAVs undetected by magnetometers. The bomb maker is still alive, not like the first responders. And there is huge malevolence in here.

      There FTFY

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 6:06am

    And because there are attacks in Iraq there's the need to spy on Americans. You know, I'm not American and it would be mildly understandable if these programs were spying international traffic. But even if we assume it's alright to fuck up with the privacy of the world it still doesn't justify spying on Americans and violating the Constitution....

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 7:48am

    And Rogers was taking shots at Helathcare.gov for not protecting people's privacy... if anyone knows about selling out privacy...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Brazenly Anonymous, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:11am

      Re:

      Ah, but you forget, the criticisms of Roger's are targeted at the fact that the site is poorly coded enough that people will know it isn't secure. After all, in his world, 'privacy violation' is synonymous with 'knowledge.'

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Jeremy2020 (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 2:40pm

        Re: Re:

        The reporter should have stepped up and asked if he was making the violation worse by talking about it on national TV and read him his quote.

        Too bad the media isn't interested in doing its job anymore.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jackn2, 2 Dec 2013 @ 7:54am

    Well, if its up, then surely they could agree, their strategies are not working.

    Seems like some basic figuring there. I look forward to hearing their new plans going forward. Hopefully, they will remember, whats has been tries, has already been proven to be ineffective, based on their own admission.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    cubicleslave (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 7:58am

    Feinstein is really losing credibility here. Where is the data to back this statement up? Its the old numbers game. Domestic terrorism is down overall.

    "Just eight private U.S. citizens died in attacks outside the United States in 2012, all in Afghanistan, according to the State Department. In the United States, seven people died in 11 terrorist attacks last year, six of them in a shooting at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin."
    "Although terrorism touched 85 countries last year, just three - Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan - suffered more than half of 2012�s attacks (55%) and fatalities (62%)."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 7:59am

    So for all the NSA spying increase so far...

    ... terrorism has increased, according to them.

    No I won't write that logical fallacy.

    In the meantime, the "anyone, anywhere, anytime" spying approach by the NSA certainly dilutes the actual anti-terrorist purpose, effort and resources.

    Q.D.E.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    OldGeezer (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:02am

    Oh Yea, They were so successful in thwarting the Boston bombing by two idiots that they were already aware of as potential threats. Turns out these guys were loners with no ties to Al-Qaeda and they were not especially bright. If our great NSA can't catch the stupid ones what chance do they have against the organized really smart ones? If they would have spent more time getting targeted warrants and investigating them instead of piling more hay on the stacks maybe this tragedy could have been prevented. Great job of connecting the dots guys!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Transmitte (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:02am

    Sadly, the public at large will eat this w/o question

    It's the new F & R circus. They are climbing the walls and throwing any/everything they can to make sure they get to keep breaking rules and disavowing that the constitution does not exist or at the very least has any weight with them.

    Why they are still in charge and not been called to account is another problem amongst the many we have daily with people who think they get to run rough shod over the constituency.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:07am

    Once again, it's worth pointing out...

    ...that Americans are more likely to be killed by their furniture than by terrorists.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Sunhawk (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 10:38am

      Re: Once again, it's worth pointing out...

      ...that Americans are more likely to be killed by their furniture than by terrorists.


      Let's be sporting and narrow it down further. According to the CPSC, 176 Americans died between 2006 and 2010 (that is, 44 a year) specifically by being *crushed by a television*.

      Over the same period, being dying from being crushed by dressers/bureaus/etc was 92 (23 a year).

      So where's the frantic call for urgent action in moving to glued down or built-into-the-wall furniture?

      Source: http://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/108985/tipover2011.pdf

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        WillWallace, 3 Dec 2013 @ 7:38pm

        Re: Re: Once again, it's worth pointing out...

        Shhhh!!!! don't give them any ideas!

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:08am

    It's hard to stop a terrorist that has an nuclear arsenal big enough to wipe out everything.

    Oh shit!
    That's us.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:44am

      Re:

      Not exact. It isn't US. It's our government and their corporate masters.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:08am

    There are new bombs, very big bombs. Trucks being reinforced for those bombs. There are bombs that go through magnetometers. Bombshells. Bonbons. Heck, there are bombs that have bombs inside them. Smart bombs. Dumb bombs. Did I mention bombs? Car bombs. Bombs that go through concrete. Uh...Bombs.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    kenichi tanaka (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:14am

    Feinstein keeps saying "bombs, bombs, bombs and more bombs". Does she own that word where she gets $5 everytime she says it? And Rogers talking about Al Qaeda and their splinter groups.

    Well, who's fault is that? The White House and Congress deciding that they had a right to invade any country in the Middle East because every country nin the Middle East who doesn't do what the White House tells them to do is labeled a terrorist.

    Where are the terrorist attacks?

    ON September 11th, Osama bin Laden only got lucky. Since then? We had a guy who tried to light his underwear on fire; another guy who tried to catch his shoes on fire and the New York attack where a guy used fertilizer that did not explode and he locked the keys to the car bomb inside the car.

    It's like Al Qaeda is outsourcing to Ringling Brothers. This was discovered to be the plot for a new Jim Carey movie.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:51am

      Re:

      Cracked had an article comparing Bin Laden to Michael Scott, from The Office.

      This...seems oddly appropriate right now.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:28am

    This goes against Obama's narrative

    I wonder if they got clearance from the King before making these statements as his version is that he has beat terrorism. That is why he tried to lie his way out of Benghazi as that showed we have not won the war on terrorism.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:30am

    It's ok Diane, the majority of those scary new bombs are actually manufactured under the guide of your FBI chums and designed to not work.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    roarshock44, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:35am

    it is entirely possible that gutting our constitution is the biggest terrorist threat out there.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Roman, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:37am

    Better listen

    Better listen to these two asshats OR THE TERRORISTS WILL 9/11NAZINRAPEGAYMARRIAGEDRUGDEALERSAREYOUSCAREDENOUGHYETGIVEUPYOURMONEYANDLIBERTIES

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    me, 2 Dec 2013 @ 8:56am

    shameful

    Because Boston doesn't count? What a shameful statement.

    " . Furthermore, if we look at attacks on the US, we find that there have basically been next to none in the US since 2001. You could make the case that 16 people have died in US "terrorist" attacks since 2001 (including the 13 soldiers killed by Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood), but you have to have a very broad definition of terrorism to do so."

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:14am

      Re: shameful

      Technically, Boston doesn't count as terrorism. But then, neither does Fort Hood.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:32am

        Re: Re: shameful

        By what definition?

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 11:30am

          Re: Re: Re: shameful

          Although there is no single definition of "terrorism", all the definitions I've seen that are being used by the US government include the qualifier that the act is intended to influence the operations or laws of the government.

          The Boston bombing did not have that purpose.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:09pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: shameful

            So now all lobbyists are now by definition terrorists. Ok, I can handle that. When are they arresting the Koch brothers and charging them as terrorists?

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:20pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: shameful

              You're just being silly now. The definitions include the qualifier. The qualifier is not the entire definition. When lobbyists start engaging in great violence, then you would be correct.

              [ link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:38pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: shameful

                Terrorism is designed to influence the will and actions of the people by creating mass fear and hysteria, not necessarily the government. Boston qualifies. As for "definitions... that are being used by the US government" that immediately makes those definitions suspect. Politicians define things however it suits them whether it is an accurate definition or not. (See: Roger's own definition of the violation of a person's privacy.)

                [ link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 2:58pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: shameful

                  In the US, the government's definition is the only one that counts. That's what will be used in court.

                  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    scotts13 (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:03am

    Stop that!

    Here's a wild thought - maybe "the terrorists" wouldn't be leaping out from under every bush if the USA didn't work so hard at pissing off the entire world?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    cubicleslave (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:08am

    I think Feinstein has bombs on the brain. Now if only her head would explode... naw, we couldn't get that lucky!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:22am

    We're not worried about some random suicide bomber from the Middle East. We're worried about abuse of government power. They claim that the terrorists are out to destroy our way of life, and yet they're the ones who have taken more freedoms a year than any known group has in their entire foundation.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:23am

    consider this. to be able to continue receiving funding, the FBI make up terrorist plots and get otherwise innocent civilians to partake in ridiculous 'plots' where they then go and arrest them!
    what is to say the same thing isn't being done by the NSA, just to keep their funding? those like the two mentioned in this post, i am sure, will go to whatever ridiculous lengths they can think of to validate their equally ridiculous and baseless claims. these two are, like the majority of the USG, more interested in not admitting to being wrong then saving face, by stopping spreading bullshit and getting on with real prevention! when you are in a position of power, you can do almost what you like and get evidence fabricated to back you up. sooner or later though, the truth comes out. the ones concerned may easily have passed on by then but the poor fuckers they leave behind are then the ones to face the music! meaning, they are as selfish and thoughtless in death as they are in life!!

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:30am

    Hey Rogers...

    Terrorism doesn't happen if you don't know about it, right? So all you have to do is stop looking for it and it will all go away.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    avideogameplayer, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:37am

    Terrorism is on the rise in the U.S...

    We call them taser-wielding police officers, zero brains and zero tolerance school faculty, politicians who think.the Constitution is a vague suggestion, college professors who think that free speech is some figment of someone's imagination...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 10:26am

    We need a law that states surveillance is a form of terrorism .. oh wait I think we do but It's in that dusty antiquated document the Constitution

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    FM Hilton, 2 Dec 2013 @ 11:22am

    Statistics don't lie

    Feinstein and Rogers should read the latest crime statistics for the United States.

    Americans are more likely to be homicide victims in their own homes or cities than by being bombed by some unknown terrorist.

    The numbers? Try 12,765 for 2012.

    Source:
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012

    How many terrorist attacks in the US were there? With how many victims?

    The numbers are rather skewed, huh?

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thom (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 11:33am

    ad 41: My anonymous friend, your are right. We should remember that 'terrorism' as a global enemy is invented and created by the CIA as early as the 80's. Even the term Al Qaeda is invented by the CIA. Five of the so called 9/11 hijackers were trained by the CIA and put on the CIA's Al Qaeda list, and send to Bosnia (Balkan, Europe) to heat up the fight and to discredit the muslims over there. And it worked: soon the US came with their fighters.

    If we want to get rid of these unjustified claims of terrorism, we should get rid of all the open questions regarding 9/11 and find out how those 3 buildings really came down.

    Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    FM Hilton, 2 Dec 2013 @ 11:44am

    There goes this discussion...

    I thought we were going to have an adult conversation about the very real problem of the NSA and now you've gone and ruined it by bringing in all the tin foil hat stuff.

    Do us a favor, Thom, please: go away and take your meds.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Thom (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 12:19pm

      Re: There goes this discussion...

      Go away? You are funny. Please do me a favor: take a look at that video. Even NIST couldn't explain why these buildings went down almost at free fall. Simple facts and rules of nature, my friend. And they don't add up. The truth is staring at us but is too dark to handle. So don't be naive: this IS the discussion, and you don't want to face it. Don't you see what is really at stake? Power, control, money. Terrorism is a false flag.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 9:51pm

      Re: There goes this discussion...

      4 months ago, you would have been saying the same thing to Thom, if he brought up that the NSA was spying on all of us, that all of our conversations are recorded, our every movement tracked.

      Maybe it is time to start to listen to some of the tin foil hatters, seems they might just be onto something

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thom (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 12:36pm

    Just look at the video first and tell what you think. Rules of nature...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:23pm

      Re:

      I think the video is not compelling. It's a lot of speculation without much in the way of solid evidence. If that's enough to get people to investigate further (as lots of people have), fine, but it's not nearly enough to draw any conclusions.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    The Real Michael, 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:17pm

    I agree with them. The threat of terrorism has increased exponentially. As a matter of fact, we've got more than a couple of them in positions of power, working day and night to undermine our rights and spy on us.

    Maybe someone should ask Senator Lindsey Graham what happened to that "missing" nuclear warhead that was secretly transferred to South Carolina sans any paperwork and precisely at the same time he began spouting about how Iran was going to attack us with, get this, a nuclear warhead.

    False. Flag.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      John Fenderson (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:23pm

      Re:

      Evidence, please.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        The Real Michael, 3 Dec 2013 @ 6:39am

        Re: Re:

        http://www.infowars.com/sen-graham-warns-of-nuke-strike-after-missing-nuke-report/

        Senator Graham warned that if we didn't strike Syria, terrorists might strike Charleston Harbor in South Carolina with a nuke. This occurred a short while after it was reported that there was a secret nuke transfer from Dyess Air Force Base to South Carolina.

        http://news.yahoo.com/general-charge-icbms-fired-171402375--politics.html

        Incidentally, a few days later, Maj. Gen. Michael Carey and Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, both responsible for overseeing ICBMs, were both fired, allegedly over issues involving personal conduct.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2454875/Air-Force-general-Michael-Carey-fired-loss-t rust.html

        And get this: Michael Carey's replacement is Maj. Gen. Jack Weinstein, whom people are speculating is a dual US/Israeli citizen. No conflict of interest there, I'm sure.

        There's been an unprecedented purging of our military as of late. Some service members have revealed that there's something of an unofficial litmus test where they're being asked whether they'd be willing to fire upon US citizens.

        You figure the rest out.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Anonymous Howard (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 7:13am

          Re: Re: Re:

          That's.. disturbing to read.

          So we can expect another conveniently timed 9/11 style attack to justify the NSA's existence and provide a convenient casus beli to attack Iran/Syria. Strictly not engineered by the USA ofc, pinky swear!

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            The Real Michael, 3 Dec 2013 @ 8:10am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            That's what they were planning, obviously, but because their plot was exposed just prior to detonating a nuke on US soil, the military brass in charge of overseeing the ICBMs were purged.

            One has to wonder whose script Seantor Graham was reading from, because whoever told him to say that is more than likely the same source giving Feinstein and the other subversive Constitution-haters their marching orders.

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Thom (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 8:11am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            No doubt, false flag operations are as old as humanity. You know that so don't be surprised.

            And here you can read what is actually behind all this:

            http://www.newsofinterest.tv/video_pages_flash/politics/misc_neocon_globalist/wolfowitz_pnac_np h.php

            How clear can it get? Here another one from 2002:

            http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/nc-pilger.html

            Who asked for evidence for what? There is not a single shred of real, science based evidence that support the official story. All crime scenes were cleaned and removed BEFORE investigations started. That is evidence in itself. There were 86 cameras in the direct environment of the Pentagon. FBI took all the tapes within the hours after impact. The very few frames that were released only after great legal pressure, don't show us a Boeing. On the contrary: it shows that there was no Boeing involved! A pilot was asked by air traffic control to fly over the Pentagon to have a look. He said: there is lot of smoke, but I don't see any remains of a large plain. This is recored on official tapes and therefor are official evidence.

            People, just believe your own eyes and common sense. There is not ANY piece of hard evidence which confirms the official story. There IS evidence that the official story is not correct.

            If the 'terrorism' argument will be busted, you can bet on it that a new false flag operation will be constructed (and probably is underway allready, because US gov is loosing credibilty rapidly).

            We should not ask ourselves 'who did it'. We should just ask 'what happened'.

            You, American people, have to insist for a new investigation. It is the government who should come up with sound evidence that scientifically supports their story, instead of using Hollywood methods of putting fraudulent frames and stories into our heads.

            The truth is staring at us. The wounds will never heal if you keep ignoring it.

            [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thom (profile), 2 Dec 2013 @ 1:43pm

    Thanks for looking. There is no speculation in this video, sorry too say. Based on scientific and professional testimonies it shows that the official version doesn't explain what happened:
    - symmetric free fall in own footprint? (impossible with regular office fires)
    - explosives found in the dust and metal pieces? (NIST never looked at explosives because they didn't expect them to find them) What?????
    - 100rds of first responders who report explosions (completely ignored by 9/11 commission and not mentioned in the official report) What??????

    This IS the evidence which is being ignored. You do the same and that is the reason why all those lies and false flags by your government and their allies are kept being used to expand power and control through mass surveillance.

    Your response is the exactly why a new investigation is needed.

    These are my final comments on this topic. All the best, God Bless America...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2013 @ 6:13am

      Response to: Thom on Dec 2nd, 2013 @ 1:43pm

      That was no "regular office fire"

      Why do I need to proceed past your first fallacy?

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Thom (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 6:47am

        Re: Response to: Thom on Dec 2nd, 2013 @ 1:43pm

        I am not sure if I understand your remark. Maybe I was unclear: WTC Building 7 fell down in its own footprint later that day. No plane hit this one, as we all know. The official explanation comes from NIST (and not from me!!) claiming that WTC7 went down due to regular office fires. What do you think? WTC7 housed offices of the CIA, FBI and the NY Police. WTC7 is the smoking gun. Doesn't smell good...

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          The Real Michael, 3 Dec 2013 @ 8:55am

          Re: Re: Response to: Thom on Dec 2nd, 2013 @ 1:43pm

          Underneath the rubble of the WTC collapse, it was an inferno of molten metal until sometime in mid-to-late December. That fact alone indicates the use of thermite. There's no way for fire to collapse a building such as WTC7 with its steel structure pancaking at freefall speed. No way is that possible.

          As for the Pentagon, I'd like to see even the most experienced airline pilot successfully navigate a Boeing 747 into its side while avoiding all trees, poles, etc. Yeah, right.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2013 @ 7:12am

        Re: Response to: Thom on Dec 2nd, 2013 @ 1:43pm

        That was no "regular office fire"


        It was a fire in an office. What else would you suggest it should be called but an "office fire"? It was certainly no towering inferno such as has occurred elsewhere on several occasions but which has NEVER caused the collapse of any steel-framed high-rise building.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Anonymous Howard (profile), 3 Dec 2013 @ 7:35am

        Re: Response to: Thom on Dec 2nd, 2013 @ 1:43pm

        You should proceed, because by not doing so you're committing The fallacy fallacy.

        Btw: 3 airplanes hijacked, one of them is destroyed before teh terrorism events. Coincidentally 3 buildings are destroyed, two with flimsy explanation, one (building 7) with even weaker one.

        I find the official explanation to be true is possible the same way winning the lottery 10 times in a row is possible. Mathematically it is "possible", but quite improbable.

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Dec 2013 @ 2:49pm

    It's Feinstein and Rogers shouting "terror" in a crowded theater, because they know that they've already lost public opinion on this, and are quickly losing Congress as well.
    I'd say "crying wolf" would be a more appropriate metaphor. Well, "crying terrorist".

    Hey, remember that story? An immature child gets his kicks by lying to people that something bad is happening, he quickly loses all credibility, and then nobody believes him when something bad really does happen?
    So, the NSA and co. have been lying to everyone about terrorists, and at this point they've pretty much lost all credibility...

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 3 Dec 2013 @ 5:21am

      Re:

      So, the NSA and co. have been lying to everyone about terrorists, and at this point they've pretty much lost all credibility


      The NSA has been hoist by its own petard. For if, as its apologists claim, those who have nothing criminal or otherwise masturbatory to hide have nothing to fear from intrusive surveillance then those who refuse to be surveilled, such as the NSA, must have many hideous crimes (but no masturbation, of course ;-) to hide; and everything's up for grabs, including 9/11 and the assassination of JFK.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Talking Turkey, 4 Dec 2013 @ 6:18am

    it's a family affair

    "Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary." -Henry Louis Mencken

    The terrorism threat is somewhat substantial, but overwhelming circumstantial evidence indicates that it is being sponsored by those who profit from all of the military contracts and NSA spying contracts. The corporate fascist dictatorship which they are building should be much more frightening, and this is exactly what Eisenhower warned about in his farewell address. By the way, did you know that Snowden's former employer and NSA spying subcontractor Booz Allen Hamilton is almost tied for the number 2 position in contract awards for ObamaCare data processing?

    http://about.bgov.com/2013-10-24/late-it-cash-surge-foreshadowed-health-law-woes/

    Did you know that Booz Allen Hamilton is primarily owned by the Carlyle Group, which has financial ties to the Bush and Bin Laden families (which brought you the war in Iraq and warrantless mass surveillance)? Did you know the Bin Laden family is intimately connected with the Saudi royal family--formerly Iraq's main competitor in the oil business? Did you know the PATRIOT Act which established this domestic spying apparatus was written before 9/11 and the people who wrote it and voted for it are now reaping fantastic profits from that, just as they are from this permanent state of war? It's all just one big happy family of psychopaths bent on world domination! (Or as George Carlin was fond of saying: "It's a big club, and you aint in it!")

    40% of global economy controlled by 147 corporations � all owned by the same people
    http://21stcenturywire.com/2013/10/03/whistleblower-karen-hudes-how-the-global-elite-rule-the- world/
    http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/who-controls-the-money-an-unelected-unaccountable- central-bank-of-the-world-secretly-does
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/economics/item/15473-wo rld-bank-insider-blows-whistle-on-corruption-federal-reserve
    http://iraqforsale.org/

    Operation Northwoods revisited: if at first you dont succeed...
    PNAC planned Iraq war; World Bank superficially linked to PNAC "new Pearl Harbor" false flag terrorism through Wolfowitz membership in both
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_Ne w_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_Harbor.22

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Dec 2013 @ 8:48pm

    Yea, look up her husband. She's a crook and covering up.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Blum#Controversy

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]


Surprise: MPAA Told It Can't Use Terms 'Piracy,' 'Theft' Or 'Stealing' During Hotfile Trial
Facebook Needs To Learn It Can't Teach Tolerance By Acting As An Overzealous Censor
Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

Friday

19:39 Important Announcement: Techdirt Is Migrating To A New Platform (0)
More arrow

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.